waminc

Jersey, I just blew those bets. 26 could have been bet opposite since 3s were MC for B, but B also had a 5+ already. I just felt that the shoe had been running with a good S40 presentation of 1s, 2s, and 3s, the 4 had not come in at 17, so wait and see what was going on. Also at 36 I didn't bet because 31 and 32 did not go to 3iar...so, let's wait. The Bank side was the side that did some jumping around while Player ran as a very good S40 shoe until hand 59 on. However I would have been out at 57 after hitting 22 twice on 3rd street. Bill

Jersey, I think I've got the post stuff right. Here's my play of your shoe. I never start betting until I see what the shoe is doing. After the first chop at hand 6, I bet for S40. I flat bet until I get 2-3 units up and also have some feel for the shoe. In this case at hand 11 I start my prog of U1D2 M2. I never feel bound to continue any prog if I am uncomfortable with it. I don't hesitate to go back to 1 and start over. I will not dig myself into a negative hole that will take large bets to get out of. Hand 16, I bet B because my count has shown no twos for B, but I only bet 1 because it's not a strong count yet. You can follow the bets and look over at the count that is broken down into P and B events in the lower part of the box. You will see where I deviated from the prog or the bet selection through your shoe and will usually see why when looking at the count. I'll be glad to answer any questions concerning the play. Be aware, I do all my "testing " live at one of the local casinos with real money. As you stated, anyone can do good at home, but put up the bucks and see how your approach really works. I DON'T LIKE MAKING BIG BETS WHEN I'M LOSING EACH ONE. THAT MEANS I'M MAKING THESE BETS WHEN I CAN'T SELECT THE CORRECT PLAY. Bill[ATTACH]1881[/ATTACH]

This is a test post [ATTACH]1879[/ATTACH]

Jersey, I ran your 1st shoe and had a high of +23, low -1, end +22 at hand #57. I'll see if I can get some help on posting shoes and let you see how I scored it. I'm not sure that link to picasa web is a good way to go. Bill

Jersey and all, Sorry for taking too long to respond. I've placed a link to 2 shoes that I posted. I just can't figure out how to paste a pic into this thread. Both shoes have bets placed by the B or P bias within the count. PJ has already given you his score card. I just put both B and P scores in the bottom of the appropriate number. I find it easier for me to look at one box to see both scores rather than having them spread across the sheet. Bill edit : having too many problems with the link.

Hi Ellis, I've been scoring the modified SAP scores(2,3,4) with the actual number of events in the bottom corners of the score box. It becomes very easy to do and gives you valuable information as to B or P bias of different run lengths. With S40, it seems to be very effective when you see, for instance the 2s might have a count of 8 with 3 Bs and 1 P and the 3s have a count of 12 with 0 Bs and 3 Ps. Betting that a second B will chop to P but a second P will follow to a third gives S40 a stronger advantage. In the 10 or so shoes I scored with this I had one shoe that lost 2-3 units and the other 9 won from 10-30 units. The 2 bigger scores were with shoes that had a strong bias on the "SAP" count and gave very good results. Something to look into. Bill

Max et al, I ran MVS' shoe with Maverick and got +18. I suspect MVS and I play more of the original Maverick. Bill

Hi all, Just got back to the forum after a week of Grandfather action. I started with a response to PJ to a PM he had sent and mentioned that I was becoming very interested in PL and type of prog for the various systems. We have developed and tweaked several systems over the past few months and have many that are very good.. excellent on some shoe types and OK on others, dead on some types. I feel that we need to match the PLs and progs with the various systems to maximize their effectiveness. By that I mean when will a U1D2, 1212..., 12321, 123 skip, 1, 1.5, 2, .. etc work best for which system? How long should the PL be for that system to work? Does stopping after 2 losses, or three losses, etc. diminish or even prevent a system to work that needs to run for 3, or 4, or 5... bets? After playing with Ellis, PJ, and Zebra twice in Tunica I see varying results based a lot on how conservative or aggresive each played. I see that there are many posts in the last week that are asking questions about PL or unit size. Maybe we need some guidance in this area. I know PJ, myself, and by his posts, Andrea are basically conservative bettors by nature. I know that I want to consistently win at $10 units with an eye on green, double green and/or black down the road, so playing conservatively now is preparing for the future when the "pucker factor" will come in to play. However, there is some level that we must play to on every system for that system to work. I would like to find out what these levels are. Any thoughts or guidance on this? Bill

PJ, As I mentioned in my PM, I'm finding RD1N to be very comparable to Mark's Maverick, winning in the mid-teens to the 20's in the few shoes I've tested. I find staying with a 3 as the cap on the prog works very well and keeps this as a 2-hi system. I also score after the WW or WLW on the hibernating side, which means that it is a no-bet (3vs3) or a 1 unit bet (3vs2). If the "weak" side wins I put it back on the count. If it loses, I put it back in hibernation with the same requirement, WW or WLW and then bring it back into play with another 3 unit count. This gives me a chance to see if the weak side is coming back and doing so with a 1 unit bet. The shoe stays in a very controlled mode. It might be too conservative; I don't really know yet. However, I still look at a method that will deliver a solid 8-12 average unit win with the goal of raising my unit to a level that is consistent with the casino I'm playing at. At this early point, I find RD1N as the easiest, nearly mechanical system yet. Good "hunting" in Tunica. I'm sorry that I can't make it, but I've got Grandfather commitments next week. Bill